Americans can’t be bothered with affairs of the world?

Sunday, Aug. 26, 2007 | 1:04 a.m.

Our nation is fighting two wars, one in Afghanistan and one in Iraq. About 170,000 of our fellow citizens in uniform serve in these two countries. In total, nearly 400,000 are deployed throughout the world - many in places, such as South Korea, where they would find themselves on the front lines of any conflict that might erupt.

We are party to a web of alliances that would obligate us to come to the aid of any number of allies, if attacked. With our massive nuclear arsenal, we have the capacity to destroy the planet. And we are, lest we forget, in the midst of a globally defined fight against terrorism.

So it is particularly dismaying to see headlines such as this recent one from the AFP news agency: "Most U.S. Adults in the Dark about World Politics." Two-thirds of American adults, according to the Harris Poll study referenced in the headline, admit they are clueless about what's going on with governments beyond our borders.

It would be hard to imagine a time when knowledge of our world is more necessary than it is now. Or more pressing, more personal. Our individual and collective economic well-being is directly tied to that of other nations. American lives are at stake, as our neighbors serve in uniform overseas. Our children's and grandchildren's futures may well depend on how the U.S. comes together with the rest of the world to address the problems of climate change and nuclear proliferation.

And yet the reason given by more than half of the poll's respondents for their ignorance of world affairs was "lack of interest."

To be fair, this is only one public-opinion survey, one that gauged people's own views of their level of knowledge. But the results here are in line with other polls and studies in recent years. They paint a cumulative picture of a democracy that holds enormous economic, diplomatic, cultural and military power, and wields it without informed input or consent from its citizens.

This is more than depressing; it is dangerous. And it contributes to a level of unfavorable feeling about the U.S. abroad that is higher, by most reports, than at any other time in your reporter's lifetime. The story from which the headline above is taken originated with a French news service and has been picked up in papers and on Web sites around the world.

When one reads things such as this, it's tempting to blame "the media." Tempting, in part, because there's a lot of blame to be shouldered in a media culture where news values consistently take a back seat to entertainment values, and where international news rarely gets into the picture at all.

But the lack of interest shown in this poll makes one wonder: If the media ran more international news, would people read it, watch it, listen to it? Should the people who own and operate our media do more to generate public interest in these kinds of stories? It's a circular argument with no clear answer but, absent a vocal public call for more international coverage, it's safe to say media owners will put their money on Britney over Britain, Paris Hilton over Paris, France.

So fairly or not, it remains up to rank-and-file citizens to learn more about the world and to let the news media know that they want the media's help in doing so. If you're looking for a reason why such an awakening is necessary, reflect on the fast-approaching sixth anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001.

That should be all the evidence we need that, even though we might not be interested in the world, the world is interested in us.